Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH] efi: avoid error message when booting under Xen
To:     Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
        Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>
Cc:     xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com>,
        linux-efi <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20200610141052.13258-1-jgross@suse.com>
 <094be567-2c82-7d5b-e432-288286c6c3fb@suse.com>
 <CGME20200709091750eucas1p18003b0c8127600369485c62c1e587c22@eucas1p1.samsung.com>
 <ec21b883-dc5c-f3fe-e989-7fa13875a4c4@suse.com>
 <170e01b1-220d-5cb7-03b2-c70ed3ae58e4@samsung.com>
 <CAMj1kXGE52Y6QQhGLU6r_9x6TVftZqfS7zyLCiDusZhV4tbhjg@mail.gmail.com>
From:   =?UTF-8?B?SsO8cmdlbiBHcm/Dnw==?= <jgross@suse.com>
Message-ID: <b4e60a2f-e761-d9ad-88ad-fe041109c063@suse.com>
Date:   Fri, 10 Jul 2020 15:38:49 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAMj1kXGE52Y6QQhGLU6r_9x6TVftZqfS7zyLCiDusZhV4tbhjg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 10.07.20 15:27, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jul 2020 at 13:17, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
> <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> [ added EFI Maintainer & ML to Cc: ]
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 7/9/20 11:17 AM, Jürgen Groß wrote:
>>> On 28.06.20 10:50, Jürgen Groß wrote:
>>>> Ping?
>>>>
>>>> On 10.06.20 16:10, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>>>> efifb_probe() will issue an error message in case the kernel is booted
>>>>> as Xen dom0 from UEFI as EFI_MEMMAP won't be set in this case. Avoid
>>>>> that message by calling efi_mem_desc_lookup() only if EFI_PARAVIRT
>>>>> isn't set.
>>>>>
> 
> Why not test for EFI_MEMMAP instead of EFI_BOOT?

Honestly I'm not sure EFI_BOOT is always set in that case. If you tell
me it is fine to just replace the test to check for EFI_MEMMAP I'm fine
to modify my patch.


Juergen